Unofficial "We Refuse to Spend $3 On One Song" Thread

[bermuddy]

Thank you for showing why my first post, stating that this thread was pointless because most people will still buy, was correct.

of course i'm still going to buy. i'm not going to buy blondie or warhols because i dont like them. the more somethign costs the more selective i'll be. ive purchased plenty of songs on RB just because they sounded like something i'd like. should it ever get to $3 i will be doing less of that.

[vedis]

I think it might help to look at it as the label finally having to do all the leg work. As RB DLC we can license, chart and submit songs for them. In RBN they are doing all of this on their own... hiring third party charters, taking time to do it in house, breaking down their own masters, learning the tools, purchasing the tools, waiting for songs to go through playtest and peer review... but the benefits are that we'll hopefully be more likely to see more bands from more labels, and we'll see them faster than we'd be able to put them into the RB pipeline, and hopefully we'll see labels reacting more quickly to community requests for artists.

personaly i wanna see these labels helping test the songs too of others and not just submiting them and waiting to see what others have to say, thatd totaly help get everyones songs out faster, and justify the increase in cost even moreso....
but thats another issue

[bermuddy]

i would pay $5 per song, for every single new found glory song AND i would buy them ALL. even the ones i dont like. THAT is my stance.

[Samuel346]

I wish I could pay $4 per some songs,

Your issue is you intend for the extra cash to go to the band. What you fail to understand is, it very very likely won't.

[brobot]

i would pay $5 per song, for every single new found glory song and i would buy them all. Even the ones i dont like. That is my stance.

this^^^^^^^^^

[brobot]

Your issue is you intend for the extra cash to go to the band. What you fail to understand is, it very very likely won't.

Why not. My band has received all its money.

[CJHobbes]

Is that clear for everyone now? Because this is what I and bmaninc have been saying for quite a while.

People buy just the same at the $3 mark as at the $2 mark and the $3 mark will become standard.

Thus, buying at the $3 mark is ENCOURAGING all DLC to be $3.

This has been the comment since the thread's inception, not just from you and bmaninc. Like hellomaster, I'm willing to take that chance. I realize the implications of my decision, and am still willing to purchase $3 songs if they're worth it to me. You have every right to make your point, but to be honest, bolding and enlarging the text to make the point that's already been stated multiple times in this thread is encouraging me to purchase every $3 track that comes out, just to be an antagonist.

I understand what might happen and am willing to "suffer" the consequences of it regardless of what happens. It all comes down to personal preference and perceived value. On top of this, we're discussing a $1 hike for optional DLC tracks that can only be utilized through a singular hobby. It's not a $2, $5 or even $10 increase in a necessity, and it won't be the end of the world.

I, for one, don't believe $3 will be the new baseline for every single piece of RBN DLC that comes out, and I've already bought quite a few "non-popular" tracks for $2 and $1. Plus, the first 10-minute song that just came out is selling for $1.

Free will, it is a @#%$!.

[Sayburr]

Well, I can't see posting or even reading this never ending discussion...

Personally, I don't see a song at $3 being worth the money in most cases (99.9% of the cases). I believe the $3 pricepoint will lower sales to the point that the charters will loose money (will lose more than 33% sales at the $2 level). Time will tell in the long run what happens.

...this is the discussion that never ends, yes it goes on and on my friends. Some people started having it not knowing what it was and they will continue having it forever just because this is the discussion that never ends, yes it goes on and on my friends. Some people started having it not knowing what it was and they will continue having it forever just because this is the discussion...

(loved little lambchop, didn't you?)

[Ultrace]

Thank you for supporting my position.

Then if your position is that it's bad for a company to be in the business of making money, I'm pretty sure there's not going to be any pleasing you in this argument. EMI is not a charity. If they can set their price at a certain point and people will pay it, why shouldn't they? Just answer me that question. Instead of spreading fear about what might happen, instead state why you think a company that is breaking no laws is unjustified in setting a price for their product if people will pay that price.

[Samuel346]

Then if your position is that it's bad for a company to be in the business of making money, I'm pretty sure there's not going to be any pleasing you in this argument. EMI is not a charity. If they can set their price at a certain point and people will pay it, why shouldn't they. Just answer me that question. Instead of spreading fear about what might happen, instead state why you think a company that is breaking no laws is unjustified in setting a price for their product if people will pay that price.

lol


My position is that if they can sell it for more, it will be more. That's all my position has ever been, broski.